Advanced

Mutual Trust and EU Fundamental Rights after Opinion 2/13

Gill-Pedro, Eduardo LU and Groussot, Xavier LU (2017) In Nordic Journal of Human Rights 35(3).
Abstract (Swedish)
The delivery of Opinion 2/13 in December 2014 has reopened the debate on mutual trust. Whereas the connection in EU law between mutual trust and EU fundamental rights is clear and can be deduced from specific provisions of the Lisbon Treaty, i.e. article 67 TFEU and article 81 TFEU, in the area of freedom, security and justice (AFSJ); Opinion 2/13 has brought an institutional dimension to the debate on mutual trust by revealing a tension between the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) and the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). Indeed, in light of Opinion 2/13, the future accession to the ECHR now appears in doubt, given the divergences in the interpretation of fundamental rights between the two courts in the case law related... (More)
The delivery of Opinion 2/13 in December 2014 has reopened the debate on mutual trust. Whereas the connection in EU law between mutual trust and EU fundamental rights is clear and can be deduced from specific provisions of the Lisbon Treaty, i.e. article 67 TFEU and article 81 TFEU, in the area of freedom, security and justice (AFSJ); Opinion 2/13 has brought an institutional dimension to the debate on mutual trust by revealing a tension between the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) and the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). Indeed, in light of Opinion 2/13, the future accession to the ECHR now appears in doubt, given the divergences in the interpretation of fundamental rights between the two courts in the case law related to mutual trust. An accession to the ECHR is only plausible in the future if this jurisprudential tension is accommodated, and there are signs in the post- Opinion 2/13 case law that such an accommodation can be found. The recent caselaw of the CJEU and the ECtHR give us some important insights into future relationship between the Luxembourg and Strasbourg courts in respect of mutual trust. (Less)
Abstract
The delivery of Opinion 2/13 in December 2014 has reopened the debate on mutual trust. Whereas the connection in EU law between mutual trust and EU fundamental rights is clear and can be deduced from specific provisions of the Lisbon Treaty, i.e. article 67 TFEU and article 81 TFEU, in the area of freedom, security and justice (AFSJ); Opinion 2/13 has brought an institutional dimension to the debate on mutual trust by revealing a tension between the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) and the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). Indeed, in light of Opinion 2/13, the future accession to the ECHR now appears in doubt, given the divergences in the interpretation of fundamental rights between the two courts in the case law related... (More)
The delivery of Opinion 2/13 in December 2014 has reopened the debate on mutual trust. Whereas the connection in EU law between mutual trust and EU fundamental rights is clear and can be deduced from specific provisions of the Lisbon Treaty, i.e. article 67 TFEU and article 81 TFEU, in the area of freedom, security and justice (AFSJ); Opinion 2/13 has brought an institutional dimension to the debate on mutual trust by revealing a tension between the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) and the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). Indeed, in light of Opinion 2/13, the future accession to the ECHR now appears in doubt, given the divergences in the interpretation of fundamental rights between the two courts in the case law related to mutual trust. An accession to the ECHR is only plausible in the future if this jurisprudential tension is accommodated, and there are signs in the post- Opinion 2/13 case law that such an accommodation can be found. The recent caselaw of the CJEU and the ECtHR give us some important insights into future relationship between the Luxembourg and Strasbourg courts in respect of mutual trust. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
in press
subject
keywords
EU Law, Human rights, EU Fundamental Rights, Mutual trust, Court of Justice of the EU, Accession to the ECHR, EU-rätt, Mänskliga rättigheter
in
Nordic Journal of Human Rights
volume
35
issue
3
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
b77ec2e3-a897-4d63-beb4-fdd8e7955102
date added to LUP
2017-07-03 16:19:42
date last changed
2017-07-21 14:43:57
@article{b77ec2e3-a897-4d63-beb4-fdd8e7955102,
  abstract     = {The delivery of Opinion 2/13 in December 2014 has reopened the debate on mutual trust. Whereas the connection in EU law between mutual trust and EU fundamental rights is clear and can be deduced from specific provisions of the Lisbon Treaty, i.e. article 67 TFEU and article 81 TFEU, in the area of freedom, security and justice (AFSJ); Opinion 2/13 has brought an institutional dimension to the debate on mutual trust by revealing a tension between the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) and the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). Indeed, in light of Opinion 2/13, the future accession to the ECHR now appears in doubt, given the divergences in the interpretation of fundamental rights between the two courts in the case law related to mutual trust. An accession to the ECHR is only plausible in the future if this jurisprudential tension is accommodated, and there are signs in the post- Opinion 2/13 case law that such an accommodation can be found. The recent caselaw of the CJEU and the ECtHR give us some important insights into future relationship between the Luxembourg and Strasbourg courts in respect of mutual trust.},
  author       = {Gill-Pedro, Eduardo and Groussot, Xavier},
  keyword      = {EU Law,Human rights,EU Fundamental Rights,Mutual trust,Court of Justice of the EU,Accession to the ECHR,EU-rätt,Mänskliga rättigheter},
  language     = {eng},
  number       = {3},
  series       = {Nordic Journal of Human Rights},
  title        = {Mutual Trust and EU Fundamental Rights after Opinion 2/13},
  volume       = {35},
  year         = {2017},
}